- Chess World Cup
- FIDE Grand Prix
- Olympiad
- World Championship
- List of strong tournaments
- List of world championships
- Checkmate patterns
- Chess openings
- Chess strategy
- Chess tactics
- Chess theory
- Endgames
- Pawn structure
- Problems/Compositions
| Defending champion | Challenger |
 |
 |
| Viswanathan Anand (IND) | Boris Gelfand (ISR) |
| Winner of World Chess Championship 2012 | |
| Born 11 December 1969 42 years old |
Born 24 June 1968 43 years old |
| Winner of the 2010 World Chess Championship | Winner of the 2011 Candidates Tournament |
| FIDE rating: 2791 (World No.4) | FIDE rating: 2727 (World No.20) |
The World Chess Championship 2012 was a chess match between the defending world champion Viswanathan Anand of India and Boris Gelfand of Israel, winner of the 2011 Candidates Tournament. After sixteen games, including four rapid games, Anand retained his title. The match, held under the auspices of the World Chess Federation FIDE, took place between 10 and 30 May 2012 in the Engineering Building of the State Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow, Russia. The prize fund was US$2.55 million.
Anand was the defending champion, having gained the title in 2007 and defended it in 2008 (against Vladimir Kramnik) and in 2010 (against Veselin Topalov). Boris Gelfand became the challenger in 2012 after winning the eight-player 2011 Candidates Tournament. Anand's subsequent victory, therefore, was his third consecutive title defence.
The match conditions called for twelve games to be played with classical time control. If a player scored at least 6½ points, he would be declared the winner and the match ended. By the end of the twelve games, however, the match was tied at 6 points each, so four rapid games were played in order to produce a result. Anand won the rapid-game playoff with a win in the second game and draws in the other three games.
The process for selecting the challenger underwent a number of changes. A major change was announced on 25 November 2008, when it was announced that a two-player Challenger Match would be replaced with an eight-player Candidates Tournament. The change was criticised by a number of players and commentators, as well as by the Association of Chess Professionals. In June 2009, FIDE indicated that the format would be in the form of matches.
Originally, the intended venue for the candidate matches was Baku, but Levon Aronian announced that he would not play in Azerbaijan and matches involving him were to be held in a different country. The venue was changed to Kazan, Russia in July 2010, but the Azerbaijan nominee Shakhriyar Mamedyarov still remained in the tournament despite the tournament not being held in Azerbaijan.
In November 2010, then world No. 2 Magnus Carlsen withdrew from the Candidates' Tournament citing the selection process as not sufficiently modern and fair. He was replaced by Alexander Grischuk.
| Seed | Place | Qualifier | Jan 2010 Rating | Jan 2010 World Rank | May 2011 World Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Loser of the World Chess Championship 2010 match | Veselin Topalov (Bulgaria) | 2805 | 2 | 7 |
| n/a | The next highest rated player in the world (average of July 2009 and January 2010 ratings) |
Magnus Carlsen (Norway) (withdrew) | 2810 | 1 | 2 |
| 2 | The second-next highest rated player in the world (average of July 2009 and January 2010 ratings) |
Vladimir Kramnik (Russia) | 2788 | 4 | 4 |
| 3 | Winner of the FIDE Grand Prix 2008-2010 | Levon Aronian (Armenia) | 2781 | 5 | 3 |
| 4 | Winner of the Chess World Cup 2009 | Boris Gelfand (Israel) | 2761 | 6 | 16 |
| 5 | Tournament organisers' nominee | Shakhriyar Mamedyarov (Azerbaijan) | 2741 | 11 | 9 |
| 6 | Third place at the FIDE Grand Prix 2008-2010 | Alexander Grischuk (Russia) (replacement for Carlsen) | 2736 | 15 | 12 |
| 7 | Runner-up at the FIDE Grand Prix 2008-2010 | Teimour Radjabov (Azerbaijan) | 2733 | 16 | 13 |
| 8 | Loser of the 2009 Challenger Match | Gata Kamsky (United States) | 2693 | 40 | 18 |
According to FIDE, the loser of the World Chess Championship 2010 (Veselin Topalov) was seeded no. 1 and the rest were seeded according to FIDE rating as of January 2010. FIDE confirmed the matches on 7 February 2011. Games of the matches were played in Kazan, Russia, from 5-25 May 2011. Tiebreaks were conducted using game in 25 minutes rapid play followed by blitz play and then armageddon games as necessary.
The schedule of the event was as follows:
Tiebreaks are in parentheses where needed.
| Quarterfinals (best of 4) | Semifinals (best of 4) | Final (best of 6) | ||||||||||||
| 1 | Veselin Topalov | 1½ | ||||||||||||
| 8 | Gata Kamsky | 2½ | ||||||||||||
| Gata Kamsky | 2(2) | |||||||||||||
| Boris Gelfand | 2(4) | |||||||||||||
| 5 | Boris Gelfand | 2½ | ||||||||||||
| 4 | Shakhriyar Mamedyarov | 1½ | ||||||||||||
| Boris Gelfand | 3½ | |||||||||||||
| Alexander Grischuk | 2½ | |||||||||||||
| 3 | Levon Aronian | 2(1½) | ||||||||||||
| 6 | Alexander Grischuk | 2(2½) | ||||||||||||
| Alexander Grischuk | 2(3½) | |||||||||||||
| Vladimir Kramnik | 2(2½) | |||||||||||||
| 7 | Vladimir Kramnik | 2(4½) | ||||||||||||
| 2 | Teimour Radjabov | 2(3½) | ||||||||||||
Russian President Vladimir Putin meets Anand and Gelfand after the competition.The 2012 FIDE World Chess Championship was held in Moscow, Russia.
The Executive Board gave during its congress in fall 2009 in Halkidiki an option to London, United Kingdom to organise the World Chess Championship for 2012. They had until 15 February 2010 to exercise the option which had to include the offer of a prize fund similar to that for the World Chess Championship 2010 match. The London Chess Classic organising body "Chess Promotions Limited" confirmed that London were in negotiations to hold the World Chess Championships in 2012. However, after FIDE failed to agree to the terms of the contract within the time frame agreed upon, the option expired on 28 January 2011, and Chess Promotions Limited withdrew their bid to organise the event in London, citing the lack of time left to successfully organise the event.
As a result FIDE opened an application procedure for the hosting of the World Chess Championship match to be played from 10 April 2012 to 31 May 2012. Organisations interested in bidding to host the event had until 31 July 2011, 13:00 GMT to submit their documents including a bid fee.
On 28 June 2011, it was announced that Moscow had submitted a bid to host the 2012 World Chess Championship.
On 13 July, the Tamil Nadu state government announced a bid of Rs 20 crore (Approx. $4.5 million) for the match to be held in Chennai, India. Chennai is the home city of the World Champion Viswanathan Anand. It was reported on 14 July that Minsk, Belarus was also interested in hosting this event.
In an interview with the Russian newspaper "Kommersant", dated 29 July, Boris Gelfand expressed his concern about the offer made by Chennai. Gelfand said the offer from Moscow was the only transparent one, he was not sure of the existence of financial guarantees by the Indian side. The Chennai offer was in Tamil language and he claimed it had not been translated in English. In the past, matches, including those of Kasparov against Ponomaryov and against Kasimdzanov were cancelled due to lack of financial guarantees.
On 2 August, FIDE announced that it received bids from the Russian chess federation (Moscow) and a second one from the All India chess federation (Chennai). Both were well above the minimum required prize fund. FIDE announced they would contact the bidders and players, and declare the winner of the bid by 10 August 2011.
Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE's president, told the Russian newspaper "Sport Express" that the financial offer was not the only criterion. Other factors, including the possibility of the propagation of the "chess in school" programme, and popularisation of chess in a particular region will also be considered. He would also take into account the views of the champion and the challenger.
On 8 August 2011, FIDE announced that the Russian Chess Federation had won the bid and will host the match in Moscow in May 2012. The prize fund will be 2.55 million US dollars. Skolkovo, the Innovation project near Moscow, was named as a possible venue.
On 20 February 2012 an agreement between the Russian Chess Federation and the Tretyakov Gallery was signed to stage there the World Championship Match. Andrey Filatov, the sponsor of the match, believes that bringing chess and art together can open a new page in chess history.
The match format was the best of 12 games. Players scored one point for a win and half a point for a draw. The match ended once either player scored a minimum of 6½ points. Time control was 120 minutes, with 60 minutes added after move 40, 15 minutes added after move 60, and 30 additional seconds per move starting from move 61.
In case of a tie at the end of 12 games, there would be a series of tie breaks:
Anand had the same group of seconds who helped his preparation in World Chess Championship 2008 and World Chess Championship 2010: Peter Heine Nielsen, Rustam Kasimdzhanov, Surya Shekhar Ganguly and Radosław Wojtaszek.
Gelfand's seconds for the match included Alexander Huzman, Pavel Eljanov, and Maxim Rodshtein.
In a post-game press conference, Gelfand confirmed the media speculation that he had additional seconds, who were not revealed. After the match Gelfand revealed that the other seconds were Evgeny Tomashevsky and Mikhail Roiz. Gelfand also said that Garry Kasparov had offered to be his second for the match and help in preparation but Gelfand refused, saying "I was really shocked. ... For me it was unthinkable to receive help from somebody who has access to secrets of my colleagues."
Before the 2012 match Anand and Gelfand played 35 games against each other at classical time control with Anand winning 6 games and Gelfand winning 5 games. Gelfand had scored his last win in 1993.
| Head-to-head record | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anand | Draws | Gelfand | Total | ||
| Classical | Anand white | 5 | 10 | 0 | 15 |
| Gelfand white | 1 | 14 | 5 | 20 | |
| Total | 6 | 24 | 5 | 35 | |
| Rapids | 8 | 19 | 1 | 28 | |
| Blitz | 3 | 4 | 0 | 7 | |
| Game | Day, Date | Anand | Gelfand | Standing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Friday, 11 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied ½ - ½ |
| 2 | Saturday, 12 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 1 - 1 |
| 3 | Monday, 14 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 1½ - 1½ |
| 4 | Tuesday, 15 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 2 - 2 |
| 5 | Thursday, 17 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 2½ - 2½ |
| 6 | Friday, 18 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 3 - 3 |
| 7 | Sunday, 20 May | 0 | 1 | Gelfand leads 4 - 3 |
| 8 | Monday, 21 May | 1 | 0 | Match tied 4 - 4 |
| 9 | Wednesday, 23 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 4½ - 4½ |
| 10 | Thursday, 24 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 5 - 5 |
| 11 | Saturday, 26 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 5½ - 5½ |
| 12 | Monday, 28 May | ½ | ½ | Match tied 6 - 6 |
| Tie break | Wednesday, 30 May | 2½ | 1½ | Anand wins 8½ - 7½ |
Games 1-12 were scheduled to begin at 15:00 local time.
| Game | Format | Anand | Gelfand | Standing |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Rapid | ½ | ½ | Tie break even ½ - ½ |
| 14 | 1 | 0 | Anand leading 1½ - ½ | |
| 15 | ½ | ½ | Anand leading 2 - 1 | |
| 16 | ½ | ½ | Anand wins 2½ - 1½ |
All tie-break games were scheduled to be played Wednesday, 30 May, with Game 13 scheduled to begin at 12:00 local time.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
           |
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Gelfand started his first game with White in the match by playing 1.d4 and the game went on to Slav Defence. The position in the game followed the game played between Kasparov and Gelfand in Linares in 1991 where Gelfand lost, but in this game the challenger opted a different line. Anand played several accurate moves to set up a good position for neutralising White's active pieces. After 19 moves were played Gelfand decided to exchange his knight for a bishop by 20.Nxf5 to avoid a presence of opposite coloured bishops, but the position afterwards appeared to be with no weaknesses and a well placed knight for Black. The game saw no progress on both sides and Gelfand offered a draw. At the press-conference he described the line he chose as "a slight symbolic edge".
Semi-Slav Defence, D45
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
 |
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The game opened with a Grünfeld Defence (as in the game 1), but Anand deviated very early by playing 3.f3 instead of 3.Nc3. Following the opening moves White gained an edge and was pawn up, but Anand ran into time trouble, having to play 7 moves per minute to reach the time control at move 40 and having missed the winning continuation in the double-rook ending.
At move 20 White chose to capture correctly with 20.Nxf6, rather than 20.Rxd2 after which the continuation 20...Nxe4 21.fxe4 Bxd4 22.Rxd4 Rf2 23.e5 Bb5 gives Black strong counterplay. In the next moves the game continued with 20...Rxf6! 21.Rxd2 Rf5 22.Bxg7 Kxg7 23.d6 (see diagram) and then 23 ...Rfc5?!. At the press-conference Gelfand said: "I understood the position was dangerous. I underestimated a few moves. I thought that 23...Rfc5 could win back the pawn, but I underestimated 24.Rd1 and here I had to fight for the draw. I was quite on edge for some time during the game." The game was drawn after 37 moves, as White could not find a line to play for a win. After the game Anand concisely said: "I came closer today."
Grünfeld Defence, D70
Semi-Slav Defence, D45
Anand started the game by switching the opening move to 1.e4 perhaps to sharpen the play, but Gelfand continued with the Sicilian Sveshnikov instead of the Sicilian Najdorf or Petroff Defence and the resulting position left the World Champion unprepared. The game reached a standard position after the theoretical moves in the opening, with a bind in the centre for White and a backward d6 pawn and weak d6 square for Black that is compensated with his activity. In the next moves Gelfand successfully equalised the position and left his opponent with minor chances. The game ended in a draw after 27 moves were played.
Sicilian Defence, Sveshnikov Variation, B33
Semi-Slav Defence, D45
Gelfand scored the first win of the match. Commentators considered 23...g5? to be the critical mistake, allowing Gelfand to get a winning position with 24 Qc7 Qxc7 25 Rxc7. Anand sacrificed his bishop for counterplay but it was not enough. In the final position, black can queen his pawn but cannot stop the threat of Ng6+ followed by Rg7 mate.
Semi-Slav Defence, D45
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Anand started the game with the same play as in the third game, but Gelfand early deviated by playing 3 ...c5 instead of 3 ...d5, which was seen in the game 3. The game was followed with 4.d5 d6 5.e4 Bg7 6.Ne2 0-0 7.Nec3 Nh5. Gelfand tried to provoke g4 by playing 7 ...Nh5, but Anand did not opt for that line. But after few moves the Black bishop occupied the f5 square and let White the opportunity to play 12.g4 with a fork on the Black's bishop and knight. The game continued with 12 ...Re8+ 13.Kd1 Bxb1 14.Rxb1. Gelfand made a serious error on move 14, overlooking Anand's 17 Qf2, which trapped Gelfand's queen. This idea was also missed by grandmaster commentators Peter Leko and Ian Nepomniachtchi, who preferred Black's position until Anand played 17 Qf2. Gelfand could have saved his queen by sacrificing his knight with 17...Nc6, but his position was still lost.
At only 17 moves, this was the shortest decisive game in World Championship history.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
For the first time in the match, the Nimzo-Indian Defence was played. Gelfand obtained a slight edge in the opening by having a position with a bishop pair and hanging central pawns against two knights and a healthy pawn structure on the opposite side. Gelfand chose a concrete line in the middlegame that was criticized by several Grandmasters and exchanged a rook, bishop and pawn for the Anand's queen. However, Anand found a way to make a fortress and defended the game that was drawn after 49 moves as the longest game since the start of the match.
Black played 15 ...Bxf3, which was evaluated to be a strange and unnecessary move, according to Peter Svidler. In the following moves White got a better position with a bishop pair and a mobile center. But, Black played 18 ...Qd6!? and provoked White to play 19.c5?!. The move was criticised in the press room and moves like 19.a3, proposed by Smirin or 19.h3, proposed by Grischuk and Shipov were probably better. The game entered an endgame with a queen for White and a rook, knight and a pawn for black. White was trying to play on the a7 pawn and to attack on the kingside, but Black appeared to have found the right evaluation in the end. He played 40 ...Ne4! before the time control, and the game was drawn after move 49.
Nimzo-Indian Defence, E54
Sicilian Defence, Rossolimo Attack, B30
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
The game started in a Nimzo-Indian Defence as in the game 9. First surprise of the game was at move 8, when Anand played 8 ...Bd7, a developing move with idea to bring the knight on the c6 square in the future. The instigator of this move was David Bronstein, but it was popular and played mostly during the middle of the 20th century.
At move 17 (see diagram), Gelfand decided not to take a risk by playing 17.Ne5 instead of the more ambitious 17.Nd2 followed with 17 ...e5! and some complications. The position that arrived after the exchange of queens was slightly better for White, but Black was in no danger. Both players agreed to a draw after 24 moves were played.
Nimzo-Indian Defence, E54
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Sicilian Defence, Rossolimo Attack, B30
Anand retained the world title by defeating Gelfand in the rapid round. He was able to put time pressure on Gelfand in all four games. In the second game with white, Anand played his moves so fast that Gelfand was forced to make moves with very few seconds to spare.
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Semi-Slav Defense, D46
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Sicilian Defence, Rossolimo Attack, B30
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Slav Defense, D12
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
| 8 |
|
8 | |||||||
| 7 | 7 | ||||||||
| 6 | 6 | ||||||||
| 5 | 5 | ||||||||
| 4 | 4 | ||||||||
| 3 | 3 | ||||||||
| 2 | 2 | ||||||||
| 1 | 1 | ||||||||
| a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | ||
Sicilian Defence, Canal-Sokolsky Attack, B50
| Rating | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | Points | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Viswanathan Anand (India) | 2791 | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | 0 | 1 | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | 6 | ½ | 1 | ½ | ½ | 8½ |
| Boris Gelfand (Israel) | 2727 | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | 1 | 0 | ½ | ½ | ½ | ½ | 6 | ½ | 0 | ½ | ½ | 7½ |
The procedures for choosing the challenger and host underwent a number of changes and controversies. A timeline is shown below: